Google isn't the only one speeding up internet access in the Lone Star state. AT&T has announced that it will build a 1 gigabit fiber network in Austin, Texas as well.

AT&T will deliver speeds up to 1 gigabit per second in Austin as part of its Project VIP expansion of broadband access.

“Most encouraging is the recognition by government officials that policies which eliminate unnecessary regulation, lower costs and speed infrastructure deployment, can be a meaningful catalyst to additional investment in advanced networks which drives employment and economic growth,” said Randall Stephenson, AT&T chairman and CEO.

"Our goal is to start connecting homes in Austin by mid-2014," said Google. "Customers there will have a similar choice of products as our customers in Kansas City: Gigabit Internet or Gigabit Internet plus our Google Fiber TV service with nearly 200 HD TV channels. We’re still working out pricing details, but we expect them to be roughly similar to Kansas City.

"Also, as in Kansas City, we’re going to offer customers a free Internet connection at 5 mbps for 7 years, provided they pay a one-time construction fee. We’re also planning to connect many public institutions as we build in Austin— schools, hospitals, community centers, etc. — at a gigabit for no charge."

I'm sure the immense size of the US and the very low population density drive up the cost for most areas. I'm sure a train-ride from coast to coast is also more expensive in the US than it is in Spain.

Also, the speed alone is not everything. I get a 50/10 VDSL line for 40€ here in Germany, but now T-Com is changing the contracts to read "no more than 75 GByte per month, unless it is content sold by T-Com or its partners". They are not enforcing it yet on my old contract, but according to c't magazine they are planning to. Sadly, the only real alternative would be bundled to cable TV, and only comes with a lousy 384kbit upstream.

size and low population density is a factor but most of the cause was because of Time Warner using its monopoly power to do nothing for many years. It wasn't long ago that if you wanted anything faster than 56k, Time Warner was your only choice. The government had to force Time Warner to lease some of its network for other ISP to exist.

I hear this argument a lot, and it does not explain why major metropolis areas are not getting faster internet speeds like what google is doing. You would think having to run one line to a building and get 500 connections in a major city would be a wet dream of any provider.

I do believe it is more of a monopoly issue and as long as there is no competition there is no need to upgrade.

Interesting. In that case, there is a difference between the US and the German problems. We also have a bit of troubles with the Quasi-Monopoly of T-Com over here, but mainly the people in small villages are suffering, because the companies refuse to build 20 Km of cable just to connect 10 Houses. Connection in bigger cities (>100k population) is quiet good, with at least 16 MBit DSL available for pretty much everybody there.

Yep, if the modem is broken they will come out in 2 hours and replace it. As far as speed sla, I'm not sure. It's been pretty reliable so I've never had to complain about speed.

I know I am getting ripped off for the internet in austin but we need static IP addresses and the faster download speed. They offer 50X5 or close to that but it's almost $500 a month if I remember correctly.

This is a remote office with no IT personal. I would spend more time on the phone and pulling my hair out trying to tell the person there how to replace the modem than I would simply calling in a service request!

I forgot on detail. You can't use your own modem with a commercial internet connection with static IP addresses. That is true with Time Warner cable and Comcast. You have to use theirs and I'm not sure that they will just give you a spare. In my Houston office the Comcast cable connection is a backup to our fiber Ethernet connection.